Invited Review
Facilitated modelling in operational research

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.09.030Get rights and content

Abstract

The traditional way of employing operational research in organisational interventions has been the expert mode. In this mode, the problem situation faced by the client is given to the operational research consultant, who then builds a model of the situation, solves the model to arrive at an optimal (or quasi-optimal) solution, and then provides a recommendation to the client based on the obtained solution. An alternative mode of engagement is to conduct the whole intervention together with the client: from structuring and defining the nature of the problem situation of interest, to supporting the evaluation of priorities and development of plans for subsequent implementation. In this latter mode, the operational researcher works throughout the intervention not only as an analyst, but also as a facilitator to the client. This paper discusses this latter mode of engagement with clients, with particular emphasis on the use of facilitated modelling as the intervention tool. Drawing on research scattered across a range of publications and domains, the review presented here provides a formal definition of facilitated modelling, together with a general framework that allows the conceptualisation of a wide variety of facilitated modelling approaches to organisational intervention. Design issues in facilitated modelling and their practical implication are discussed, and directions for future research identified.

Introduction

There is little doubt of the positive role and impact that the discipline of Operational Research (OR) has had in organisations since its appearance over more than half a century ago. This is aptly illustrated by the EURO Medal and the Franz Edelman prizes, two of the most prestigious awards for the practice and proven impact of operational research projects. Indeed accounts of successful organisational interventions that demonstrate the value that OR can provide are regularly published in this journal and other academic and practitioner outlets, such as Interfaces and the Journal of the Operational Research Society. Modelling and analysis are at the core of these reported interventions, which show how the development and use of OR models can help organisations tackle a wide variety of complex problem situations.

The most common and traditional way of conducting these OR interventions is to adopt what we call the expert mode, where the operational researcher uses OR methods and models that permit an ‘objective’ analysis of the client’s problem situation, together with the recommendation of optimal (or quasi-optimal) solutions to alleviate that problem situation. Most OR text books offer excellent advice on how to perform such type of analysis, which has been successfully used to solve a broad range of challenging management problems in areas such as logistics, operations, marketing, and finance.

On the other hand, when dealing with problem situations at a more strategic level, the expert mode of intervention may not always be appropriate. There may be several reasons for its inadequacy in such circumstances including: lack of agreement on the scope and depth of the problem situation to be addressed; the existence of several stakeholders with distinct and, often conflicting, perspectives, objectives, values and interests, which have to be negotiated in order to reach a decision about the problem situation; and the varying levels of participation required in the decision making process, which can have a significant impact on whether the solutions derived from the analysis are not only desirable for the client, but also politically feasible (i.e. implementable and supportable) for the organisation (Eden, 1992, Rosenhead and Mingers, 2001a).

Since the 1980s, an alternative way of conducting OR in organisational interventions has been suggested, where the operational researcher acts not only as an analyst, but also as a facilitator to the client. This approach uses facilitated modelling as the intervention tool, which requires the operational researcher to carry out the whole intervention jointly with the client: from helping to structure and define the nature of the problem situation of interest, to supporting the evaluation of priorities and development of plans for subsequent implementation. This mode of engagement is particularly suitable for supporting the analysis of complex problem situations, or the evaluation of strategic decisions, given the characteristics we have described above.

Despite being promoted for nearly three decades, and successfully employed in practice, there is not – as far as we are aware – a general framework that allows the conceptualisation of the wide variety of facilitated modelling approaches reported in the literature. This review is an attempt to provide such a framework, and to discuss its implications for OR intervention design and practice.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows. We start our review by examining two alternative modes of engagement between clients and OR consultants. We then examine the concept of facilitation, with particular emphasis on group facilitation. Following it, we discuss four key dimensions of facilitated modelling: the characteristics of a facilitated modelling process; the nature of facilitative models; the outcomes of facilitated modelling; and the skills of facilitated modelling. We then classify well-established approaches developed within the operational research, decision sciences, and systems fields; and list the outcomes which have been claimed to be the result of their use. We devote the latter part of the paper to a discussion of some of the design issues of facilitated modelling and their implications for practice. The paper ends with conclusions and suggests some directions for future work in the field of facilitated modelling.

Section snippets

Modes of consultancy engagement

In this section, we briefly describe two alternative modes of engagement in OR interventions. Our discussion below draws primarily on the taxonomies developed by Schein, 1998, Eden and Sims, 1979, within the organisational development and operational research fields, respectively.

Facilitation as an intervention approach

The notion of facilitation has been known for centuries. Hogan (2002) argues that ancient philosophers such as Socrates deployed what can be considered facilitation skills, such as questioning, story telling, metaphors and self-reflection, to engage people in challenging their mindsets and encouraging new ways of thinking. With roots in cognitive science, social psychology, community development and negotiation, facilitation has been advocated by its proponents as a tool to assist participants

Facilitated modelling

Earlier in the paper we discussed the appropriateness of the facilitated mode of OR consultancy for certain type of problem situations. In practice, a facilitated mode requires both carefully managing the client–consultant relationship, and conducting facilitated modelling throughout the intervention. The first aspect has been treated extensively elsewhere (e.g. Eden and Ackermann, 2004, Eden and Sims, 1979, Williams, 2008) so our focus is on the second aspect.

The term ‘facilitated modelling’

Types of facilitated modelling

We have selected a family of modelling approaches that, in our view, sit comfortably within the definition and characteristics of facilitated modelling articulated above:

  • Facilitated problem structuring: A set of modelling methods collectively known as ‘Soft OR’ methods. Their main features are: the assumption of subjectivism (different views about the world); groups as the key organisational resource to share and produce knowledge, and make recommendations; the limited role of quantification in

Intervention design issues and implications for practice

In this section we focus on design issues that an OR consultant may consider when conducting interventions based on facilitated modelling. Our emphasis will be on the design of the facilitated modelling process itself, rather than the entire OR intervention. Broader design issues related to facilitated OR interventions, including the management of the consultant-client relationship, have already been treated extensively elsewhere (Ackermann, 1996, Eden and Ackermann, 2004, Eden and Sims, 1979,

Conclusions and directions for future research

This paper reviewed a particular mode of OR intervention in organisations: facilitated modelling – a process by which OR models are created jointly with clients in a facilitated mode. The paper distinguished such mode of intervention from the more traditional expert mode, usually adopted by OR consultants. It suggested a definition for facilitated modelling, and discussed several of its main aspects such as the process of facilitated modelling, the nature of facilitative models, the outcomes

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank the detailed and insightful feedback of two anonymous referees, which helped to improve our draft.

References (107)

  • J. Mingers et al.

    Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies

    OMEGA

    (1997)
  • G. Montibeller et al.

    Structuring resource allocation decisions: A framework for building multi-criteria portfolio models with area-grouped projects

    European Journal of Operational Research

    (2009)
  • R. Ormerod

    Putting soft OR methods to work: Information systems strategy development at Parabola

    OMEGA

    (1998)
  • L. Phillips

    A theory of requisite decision models

    Acta Psychologica

    (1984)
  • M. Poyhonen et al.

    Behavioral and procedural consequences of structural variation in value trees

    European Journal of Operational Research

    (2001)
  • B. Roy

    Decision science or decision-aid science

    European Journal of Operational Research

    (1993)
  • F. Ackermann

    The role of computers in group decision support

  • F. Ackermann

    Participant’s perceptions on the role of facilitators using group decision support systems

    Group Decision and Negotiation

    (1996)
  • F. Ackermann

    Modeling for litigation: Mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches

    Interfaces

    (1997)
  • F. Ackermann et al.

    Issues in computer and non-computer supported GDSSs

    Decision Support Systems

    (1994)
  • F. Ackermann et al.

    Contrasting single user and networked group decision support systems for strategy making

    Group Decision and Negotiation

    (2001)
  • F. Ackermann et al.

    SODA and mapping in practice

  • R. Ackoff

    The future of operational research is past

    Journal of Operational Research Society

    (1979)
  • Afordakos, O., Franco, L.A., O’Brien, F., 2008. Understanding facilitated modelling in-use: An exploratory study with...
  • H. Akkermans et al.

    Client’s opinions on group-model building: An exploratory study

    System Dynamics Review

    (1997)
  • D. Andersen et al.

    Scripts for group model building

    System Dynamics Review

    (1997)
  • V. Belton et al.

    Integrated support from problem structuring through to alternative evaluation using COPE and VISA

    Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

    (1997)
  • Belton, V., Stewart, T.J., 2002. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An integrated approach. Dordrecht:...
  • J.R. Brown et al.

    Integrating ecology into natural resource management policy

    Environmental Management

    (1996)
  • R.Y. Cavana et al.

    Drivers of quality in health services: Different worldviews of clinicians and policy managers revealed

    System Dynamics Review

    (1999)
  • P. Checkland

    Systems Thinking, Systems Practice

    (1981)
  • P. Checkland

    Soft Systems Methodology: A 30-year Retrospective

    (1999)
  • P. Checkland et al.

    Learning for Action: A Short Definitive Account of Soft Systems Methodology and its Use for Practitioners, Teachers and Students

    (2006)
  • P. Checkland et al.

    Soft Systems Methodology in Action

    (1990)
  • J. Conklin

    Dialog Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems

    (2006)
  • S. Cropper

    Variety, formality, and style: Choosing amongst decision-support methods

  • A. De Geus

    Planning as learning

    Harvard Business Review

    (1988)
  • M. Doyle et al.

    How to Make Meetings Work: The New Interaction Method

    (1976)
  • C. Eden

    Problem construction and the influence of OR

    Interfaces

    (1982)
  • C. Eden

    Problem solving or problem finishing

  • C. Eden

    Operational research as negotiation

  • C. Eden

    The unfolding nature of group decision support: Two dimensions of skill

  • C. Eden

    A framework for thinking about group decision support systems

    Group Decision and Negotiation

    (1992)
  • C. Eden et al.

    Use of ’Soft OR’ models by clients: What do they want from them?

  • C. Eden et al.

    Tackling Strategic Problems: The Role of Group Decision Support

    (1990)
  • C. Eden et al.

    The intersubjectivity of issues and issues of intersubjectivity

    The Journal of Management Studies

    (1981)
  • G. Egen

    Face to Face: Small Group Experience and Interpersonal Growth Monterey

    (1973)
  • D. Fielden et al.

    Systemic approach to energy rationalisation in island communities

    International Journal of Energy Research

    (1998)
  • L.A. Franco

    Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: A conceptual development

    Journal of the Operational Research Society

    (2006)
  • L.A. Franco

    Facilitating collaboration with problem structuring methods: A case of an inter-organisational construction partnership

    Group Decision and Negotiation

    (2008)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text